Like a spy who gets a burn notice, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has suddenly lost his support.

Bernanke has gone from being Time magazine’s Man of the Year in 2009 to … what? A Fed chairman embroiled in a controversial reconfirmation process before U.S. Congress. Why the sudden turnaround in his fortunes?

Robert Prechter, president of the research firm Elliott Wave International, has written about the history of the Fed and its chairmen several times over the years, and his research shows that their popularity rises and falls with social mood, which is measured by the stock market. Here is a compilation of excerpts from Prechter’s monthly market letter, The Elliott Wave Theorist, from 2005-2009 about the trouble he sees brewing at the Fed.

(November 2005) The Coming Change at the Fed | Public figureheads have a way of representing eras. This is certainly true of entertainment icons and politicians. The history of Fed chairmanship implies a similar tendency for changes of the guard to coincide with changes in social mood and therefore stock prices and the economy. [The chart below] depicts our social-mood meter—the DJIA—since the Fed’s creation in 1913, marked with the reigning chairmen according to a list on the Fed’s website.

The first chairman, Hamlin, presided over a straight-up boom. As it ended, Harding took over and presided over an inflationary period that accompanied a bear market, exiting just as a new uptrend was developing. Crissinger took over at the onset of the Roaring Twenties, and Young presided over the boom, the peak and the rebound into 1930. Meyer took over just as confidence was collapsing and left the office in early 1933 at the exact bottom of the Great Depression. The next three chairmen struggled through the choppy years of the 1940s. Then Martin presided over virtually the entire advance from the early 1950s through 1969, exiting just before the recession of 1970. Burns and Miller presided over a bear market and exited as the new uptrend was developing. Volcker, after weathering an inflation crisis, presided over the explosive ’80s. Greenspan has presided over the manic ’90s and the topping process. [Ben Bernanke] will have his own era. Given the eras that have immediately preceded the coming change in leadership, the odds are that this new environment will be a bear market.

(June 2006) Economists are convinced that the Fed can “fight” inflation or deflation by manipulating interest rates. But for the most part, all the Fed does is to follow price trends. When the markets fall and the economy weakens, the price of money falls with them, so interest rates go down. When the markets rise and the economy strengthens, the price of money rises with them, so interest rates go up. The Fed’s rates fell along with markets and the economy from 2001 to 2003. They have risen along with markets and the economy since then. Regardless of the Fed’s promise to keep raising rates, you can bet that the price of money will fall right along with the markets and the economy. Pundits will say that the Fed is “fighting” deflation, but it will simply be lowering its prices in line with the others.

It is highly likely that the next eight years or so will test the nearly universally accepted theory—among bulls and bears alike—that the Fed can control anything at all. The Great Depression made it look like a gang of fools, as will the coming deflationary collapse. We have predicted unequivocally that the new Fed chairman will go down as Hoover did: the butt of all the blame, and if you are reading the newspapers you can see that it’s already started. “When Bernanke Speaks, the Markets Freak” (San Jose Mercury News, June 10, 2006); “Bernanke is being blamed for spooking Wall Street” (USA Today, June 7, 2006); “Bernanke to blame for volatility” (Globe and Mail, Canada, Jun 13, 2006). The new chairman had a brief honeymoon (which we also predicted), but it’s already over.

By the way, I heard his commencement speech at MIT last week, and in it he spoke eloquently of the value of technology and free markets. But he also opined that economists have successfully applied technology to macroeconomics. We believe that the collective unconscious herding impulse cannot be tamed, directed or managed. In our socionomic view, the Fed cannot control the mood behind the markets, but rather, the mood behind the markets controls how people judge the Fed. We’ll ultimately find out who’s right.